[xzins]

most theistic evolutionists are Christian...

Yes, I agree with that.

However, their thoughts on this subject are pure speculation. There is no sacred text that reads "out" this notion. It is an idea that can only be read "into" the text.

This is the interpretive fallacy known as eisegesis.

I don't want to belabor my point, though. The bottom line is that theistic evolutionists have no supporting revelation. They made it up. They needed evolution to fit creation, so they came up with this answer that has "God guiding the evo process."

There is nothing, however, in sacred Christian scripture that SAYS such a thing.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"However, their thoughts on this subject are pure speculation. There is no sacred text that reads "out" this notion. It is an idea that can only be read "into" the text."

It's based on a reading of the Bible. Just not the interpretation YOU read into it.

All religious claims are speculative. Just because some are written down in a *sacred* text doesn't make them any more valid. Theology isn't science.

" The bottom line is that theistic evolutionists have no supporting revelation."

Revelation isn't necessary for theism. That being said, all *revelation* in a sacred text is based on faith.

"They needed evolution to fit creation, so they came up with this answer that has "God guiding the evo process.""

Actually, they try to make creation fit the facts of science (not just biological evolution, but geology, physics, cosmology, and a host of other sciences that are in conflict with a literal reading of the Bible).

[Buggman]

I saw this thread yesterday and considered posting to it, but decided it wasn't worth rising to the flame-bait of the evos.

Again, let us all remember that when Richard Sternberg published Stephen Meyer's article supporting ID in the Smithsonian, despite the fact that it had crossed all the standard hurdles for being peer-reviewed before publication, the Evocratic Inquisition did not refute the article--they pitched a hissy-fit and went out of their way to ruin Sternberg's career.

The instant they did this, and the instant the evos here on FR turned a blind eye to it, they lost the scientific high ground. They lost all right to kvetch, moan, and complain that ID and Creationism aren't really "science" because they don't publish peer-reviewed research, since they have guarunteed that no one else will publish it. They also lost all right to harp on the persecution of Galileo, ever. And this needs to repeated to them every single time the missionry evos post yet another article claiming that ID and Creationism aren't scientific or that evolution hasn't become a religion.

The funny thing is that they're losing the public debate--and they're very much aware of it. Despite public school indoctrination, thousands of articles, TV shows, and movies, and millions of dollars in tax money being poured into the support of evolution, polls consistantly show that the overwhelming majority of Americans reject evolution as the "answer to everything" that it's been touted as.

And that's why they're becoming more shrill.

It's interesting to watch, but I no longer believe it profitable to bother to debate a group of people that stack the deck the way the evos do.